Laserfiche WebLink
Councilmember Scott directed another question to the presenter, If Dollar General decides that <br /> business isn't good, they can pull out of the lease and you have an empty shell building?And if <br /> this is zoned commercial, anything can go in there? <br /> Mr. Wojtlia replied, I don't know your specific zoning classification MU ordinance but with the <br /> rezoning to an MU, permitted use in the MU could be something else. We do have a fifteen(15) <br /> year lease with Dollar General and their credit rating is stellar. If they decide to pull out, they <br /> would still have to pay for fifteen(15) years. <br /> Committeemember Jerry Phipps asked Mr. Corcoran, It seems like we are locating the building <br /> with proximity to the sidewalk. Although this developer is putting a sidewalk in front of his <br /> property, it doesn't connect anywhere. You had mentioned some hope that the property to the <br /> west would eventually redevelop and build a sidewalk. Would the City have any plans of putting <br /> a sidewalk in? It seems to me that's a pretty unlikely situation. <br /> Mr. Corcoran replied, I wouldn't want to commit to that right now but it's definitely something <br /> that if the neighboring properties were to redevelop, we would be requiring them to do that. <br /> These types of plans are incremental and we don't have the ability to dictate which goes first. <br /> The visibility issue, four hundred (400) feet, is a city block. To me there is lots of visibility. With <br /> this development,we hope the Volcano will benefit from this type of development. <br /> Committee Chair Davis asked, In the spirit of understand our neighbors who may or may not <br /> have been a part of that plan, how can variances be used to bring peace to neighbors coming in? <br /> Why can't we work to do that in this situation?My hope in having this delayed was to bring <br /> some understanding when you heard everything being presented, and an option presented <br /> together where these two (2) groups can come together. I didn't hear that. It seems like it's <br /> becoming a conflict between the Area Plan Commission and the Volcano. <br /> Mr. Corcoran replied, I understand the petitioner is willing to move the building back. What we <br /> want to do is create successful places in the future. What this plan does is set up the principles <br /> for successful places. Pushing buildings back does not do that. I'm not talking about the specific <br /> project, I'm talking about the place. What we are trying to do, over time and incrementally as <br /> areas redevelop within this plan, is set and stick to the guiding principles. One of them being in <br /> this case where the building setback is in hope to create walkable retail and residential <br /> environments. This building does that,but what we want is to stick to the plan that creates that <br /> environment over time and into the future. We can't choose where the first development <br /> happens. <br /> Committeemember Gavin Ferlic stated, I look forward to hearing from the public. I think plans <br /> are great and adhering to plans is necessary but flexibility to some extent is a reasonable <br /> concession. <br /> Mr. Rossell stated, In my opinion, you pay your staff to make these plans at the city level. We <br /> are indifferent in moving it back and have gone through several revisions to comply with these <br /> requests of the plans. That's why Tim's office is supporting this because it fits in the plan. <br /> 4 <br />